Cadet Chapel, the landmark Gothic church that is a center for spiritual life at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, hosted its first same-sex wedding Saturday.

Penelope Gnesin and Brenda Sue Fulton, a West Point graduate, exchanged vows in the regal church in an afternoon ceremony, attended by about 250 guests and conducted by a senior Army chaplain.

The two have been together for 17 years. They had a civil commitment ceremony that didn’t carry any legal force in 1999 and had long hoped to formally tie the knot. The way was cleared last year, when New York legalized same-sex marriage and President Barack Obama lifted the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy prohibiting openly gay people from serving in the military.

The brides both live in New Jersey and would have preferred to have the wedding there, but the state doesn’t allow gay marriage…

The ceremony was the second same-sex wedding at West Point. Last weekend, two of Fulton’s friends, a young lieutenant and her partner, were married in another campus landmark, the small Old Cadet Chapel in West Point’s cemetery.

Fulton has campaigned against the ban on gays in the military as a member of two groups representing gay and lesbian servicemen and servicewomen. She graduated from West Point in 1980, a member of the first class to include women.

She served with the Army Signal Corps in Germany and rose to the rank of captain, but left the service in 1986 partly because she wanted to be open about her sexual orientation. President Obama appointed her last year to the U.S. Military Academy’s Board of Visitors.

Nice to see the US Military continue to march into the 21st Century at a faster pace than some political chickenhawks. For those of us who lived through the end of Jim Crow in our military, the result isn’t a complete surprise. Unlike some politicians, the Pentagon accepts the law of the land – instead of trying to slink back into the past.

My wife and I lived together for 18 years before we married. The piece of paper was really just a formality to keep the government from screwing us taxwise. Otherwise we probably would never have married.

I object to changing the global and historic meaning of the word “marriage” to include same sex couples…

And I don’t agree with polygamy…Christ taught monogamy as the ideal and his apostles taught that, but allowed some time for transition for those in polygamous marriages for it would be morally wrong to divorce those wives who would also likely starve with no financial support.

So the question remains, its a “slippery slope argument” that is sound because you have removed the word “marriage” from any defining context.

Word have meaning, same sex union is historically, over 6,000 throughout the earth….NOT meant by the word “marriage.”

If its meaning is changed, by fiat….because religious definitions no longer are considered…then why not change it to include polygamous marriage….or trans species unions? etc.

As 6000 years of human history world wide didn’t prevent “marriage” from applying to what it once was in contrast too, what else is not covered by the term? Why can’t the word “marriage” become a word that can meaning anything “united”?

The only people who should be concerned with the “christian” view of marriage, are christians. Nothing is stopping them from pursuing a “christian” marriage. Nothing should stop a gay couple from pursuing a marriage either.

Hey Taxed, could you point me exactly to where Jesus says anything about gay marriage? I can’t seem to find it in the Bible when I look. Oh, and how about monogamy too while you’re at it. I _do_ remember that the old testament actually had requirements for polygamy in it, but can’t find anything about it in the New Testament so far. Thanks.

Well, since I said Taxed, it should be apparent that I’m replying to “Taxed Enough Already Dude” after he replied to Jim. The thread made it difficult to find the correct “reply” link, but I thought I had. Don’t get your feathers in a ruffle!

Why is the US military involved with marriage at all? As far as I’m concerned, Westpoint shouldn’t have been used for any wedding, gay or not. I wonder if they had to pay a rental few for the facility?

Make marriage just like any other business or personal contract. You hire a lawyer to draft the agreement, both sign it and use existing civil procedures for dissolving if needed. Marriage shouldn’t any special status legally speaking, make it a partnership agreement and end all this arguing.

Contracts are for adults; contracts are something children don’t understand, nor should they.

The relationship commitment is needed to best raise healthy offspring. However, in today’s modern society we have “dumbed” down what children need and mass-produced what we adult conveniently believe will provide for them. Divorce is more the norm today; whereas, couple generations ago (3), pre baby boon it was rare.

Granted all traditional marriages weren’t perfect then; but I bet the byproduct, children where in general much more emotionally secure, health, happy, productive and self reliant!

We now have changed our view, to fit with a selfish disposable trend, me first and me must feel good society.

Children are not much more then a status symbol of convenience now then something couples are committed too!

Today, it takes almost more then two full-time working spouses to afford a house. That wasn’t the case 40-60yrs ago.

It used to be, generations ago, America invested and built itself up for the next generation. Now Americans only can care about today’s entertainment and maybe tomorrow’s.

And, I am not talking about having a large budget deficit that’s necessary to keep the economy going. I am talking about investing wisely in infrastructure, I am talking about business not off-shoring manufacturing, I am talking about not having unnecessary wars, I am talking about wise investing in R&D, and I am talking about affordable education….

Then, why complain about the drones, sheep-e? You got what you wanted and nothing that you listed on that comment will come via your messiah or did you forget he already had 4 years in which he did nothing?

Looks like a couple of near corpses hauled in from the senior citizens center.

If they want to do a civil union for what ever reason that makes them happy that’s their business.

Why people want to use a theoretically religious building of the Jewish/Christian/Islamic faith for this escapes me. The texts of all three faiths say you are going to hell and the topic of stoning does come up. All three faiths celebrate marriage and the children they produce. I’m not sure that Buddha signs of on this either in fact I don’t know of a traditional faith that does.

Sure Herod had a bunch of male/eunuch slaves in his harem along with a bunch of females but they weren’t wives. Tiberius was into guys as well though it isn’t clear that his lovers wanted anything to do with him. What he did to his minnows was sick beyond words and his heir was one of the sickest pukes to ever run any government.

Why people want to use a theoretically religious building of the Jewish/Christian/Islamic faith for this escapes me. /// Location? View? Cost? To feel they fit in? Family Tradition? To stick it to god? Really, there are all kinds of reasons.

Escapes you? ==== BWHAHAHAHAHA! That is a funny.

Make the longest list you can of that which does NOT escape you?

FREEEEEEEEEEEEEDOM: leaving other people alone. Something that escapes most religious types including their Fuhrer.

Silly hypocritical Hoomans…….. well, they’d be hypocrites if they actually though anything in the first place…… speaking of what escapes them.

Its God’s right to punish them for doing as they please, against his Law:

9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,
10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.
11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God. (1Co 6:9-11 NKJ)

As a libertarian, I don’t want government imposing its will on people, but as a libertarian, neither should they impose silence upon me when I, in Christian love, tell these they will not inherit God’s kingdom practicing what God declared is sin.

TEAD and the rest of you lot, you do know that when Sir William Wallace (played so, hum, eloquently by Mel Gibson) was screaming Freeeedom! at the end of the movie, he was getting him balls ripped off, just before they drew and quartered him.

That was the most short lived cry of freedom, rapidly morphing into a little girl scream.

I don’t want Government invovled in the private lives of people…if they want same sex, or multiple sex “unions”…that shouldn’t be illegal.

Government initially got into the business of marriage when they wanted to outlaw interracial marriage between blacks and white. Now it’s redefining it to allow for the union of people of the same gender. Sounds like great examples of how government should get out of peoples’ lives.

In other words, invent a new word for same sex unions…that precisely refers to that and not to “marriage as defined by 6,000+ years of human history.”

They already have that but it isn’t good enough for them. It’s called “civil union”.

I meant the text of a law has only one correct (parsimonous) or “origninalist” interpretation.

When interpreting a document to gain the AUTHOR’S intent, you must define words as the author intended.

You cannot change the meaning of words IN A DOCUMENT ALREADY WRITTEN, to have meaning unintended by the author.

Originalism is a principle of interpretation that tries to discover the original meaning or intent of the constitution.[1] It is based on the principle that the judiciary is not supposed to create, amend or repeal laws (which is the realm of the legislative branch) but only to uphold them.[1] The term originated in the 1980s [2] but the concept is a formalist theory of law and a corollary of textualism.

Critical exegetes of scripture have the same goal.

Its the only “honest” thing to do with the words of another.

If words can mean what the author did not intend, then your question can be changed into a statement, one you likely would not like:

Do you really and truly believe that that the law once written cannot be changed because someone defines a word a specific way and someone else “wants” to change it?

“WE really and truly believe that the law once written can be changed because government defines words in a specific way and to no one else wants to change it.”

If words can be changed contrary to the author’s wishes, then everything you say can be twisted to teach the opposite of what you believe.

If you want to change a law, then rewrite the law using words as you mean them…

Change doesn’t happen legitimately by reinterpreting statements to whatever is desired…that is Pandora’s box our of which all sorts of evil will come.

If nothing informs the law regarding the definition of the word marriage, if 6000+ years usage throughout the earth doesn’t define the term….then what does?

Is the sensibilities of gay in San Francisco that defines the word?

What about those of Elmer Fudd on the farm, with his lambs? How is his opinion not protected by the law, equally to gays in San Francisco?

And why limit marriage to a couple…what law of logic is mandates that…and outlaws multiple couples…

IF marriage can be radically redefined without any reference to historical usage…what other terms can be redefined…how about “citizenship”…why not redefine that to include everyone on earth…the are all citizens…

So lets allow Muslim countries follow Sharia law vote in the US, to determine the political makeup of our country…along with us…

Being “citizenship” has no real reference to historical usage, why not?.

IF marriage can be radically redefined without any reference to historical usage…what other terms can be redefined…how about “citizenship”…why not redefine that to include everyone on earth…the are all citizens…

Liberals would have us all believe socialism and communism are actually pretty good forms of government.

I see alot of blather about “redefining words.” Marriage began as a legal agreement transferring property (a daughter) between one man (the father) and another (the husband).

Polygamy used to be not just tolerated but encouraged.

Feudal Lords used to have “first night” privileges with every newly wedded bride

Interracial unions were once illegal. Inter-class unions were once illegal.

Divorce used to be illegal.

Marriage has been redefined countless times. For all the posturing about the “sanctity of marriage” I hear little about the sanctity of our government. Define marriage how you want, but its illegal for our government to discriminate against a group of people for no reason. One way or the other it has to change.

Psycholinguistics. Its all definitional and interactive. How do you “think” if you think words only mean one thing? Compare to what the same psycho would think if he applied the notion that words mean what they actively lead to concluding?

Now, to google just why there is a Chapel on the Academy grounds. I’ll bet its “called” a place of quiet reflection completely supporting the notion of a gay wedding ceremony. Interesting how religion has its nose into the tent of Air Force command.

Insidious. Can’t serve god AND country. Good thing for the military/society that hoomans are basically hypocrites otherwise rationality wouldn’t stand a chance.

….. and first: consider the guidelines by which you will consider the question. From what context?

As an issue of individual rights?==as in why not as everything is consensual, or

As an issue of societal benefit or harm to “all” those involved including those not polyentrenched. Yes—everything is connected to everything else. Everything having its chaotic butterfly effect on everything else.

Pros and Cons to all we do, oft times REVERSED when we change the context as suggested above.

Hmmmm. Rich Criminal Liars getting as many spouses as they wish while the poor unable to afford more than one?

Polyamorus: Polyamory (from Greek p??? [poly], meaning “many” or “several”, and Latin amor, “love”) is the practice, desire, or acceptance of having more than one intimate relationship at a time with the knowledge and consent of everyone involved. /// You are right, I did not fixate on the emPHAsis you apparently find controlling, but as referenced even in this thread==the context is marriage arrangements?

6/7/2010 5:11:13 AM ETHomosexuals are proudly serving now across the Armed Forces. If memory serves me correctly there isn’t a question asking individuals their sexual orientation. So to say that homosexuals are not allowed in the military is an inaccurate statement. The issue boils down to whether this lifestyle should be accepted and it should not. The UCMJ would have to be changed to reflect this lifestyle. Contrary to popular belief, our laws were derived from the Bible. Where else is there in the world a book that outlines what is right and what is wrong not according to man’s standard of living. If some had their way, we would live in a wild wild west society where wrong is right and right is wrong.

In my religion, God set forth two simple rules :
(1) Be cool
(2) Don’t be an ass

I don’t see how God decided that a 1,900 page owners manual was prudent. Then it was rewritten by some other guy. The current poop is also making edits . Seems hokey to me. Remember , these guys thought the earth was flat. You with me on this?

22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in. (Isa 40:22 NKJ)

7 He hangs the earth on nothing. (Job 26:7 NKJ)

Your religion requires another rule, and it should be #1

Better to keep your mouth shut and let people suspect you are stupid, than to open it and remove all doubt.

osama being reelected is a sign we are in The Last Days before Christ comes, osama Evolved just before he was reelected ( we all know why, osama wanted the votes, and will do whatever it takes to get them no matter the source. A Morally Corrupt administration was needed and wasn’t hard to find, at the Demonrat Convention they voted to leave out the Name of God, until the Decent Moral people in the convention ( who are in the Minority in the Demonrat party ) made such an uproar that they had to put Gods name back. Evil and Immorality are taking over the world. God says in the Bible that ( Homosexuality is an Abomination, ( Old Testament, Leviticus ) and is very Concise and Clear about this Ugly Sin in God’s eyes in the New Testament Romans ch. one, yet these ( People ) think that they can Revel and Celebrate their SIN and Throw it in GOD’S FACE EVERY SINGLE DAY OF THEIR LIVES AND THEY ARE GOING TO DIE AND GO TO HEAVEN, I WOULDN’T HOLD MY BREATH.
BY THE WAY, IT DOESN’T MATTER HOW CUTE OR NOBLE THE LOOK ITS JUST AN EVIL FACADE.

God does Love them, but he doesn’t love their SIN, and he won’t overlook it, but if they REPENT OF THEIR SIN HE WILL FORGIVE THEM. You can’t have your SIN, and Live it t00!!!

Ancient Rome The Greatest Nation in the World at that time in history. Became Corrupt Morally and Sexually as America is doing,
Anything goes and is Gradually becoming Accepted here in America Too, but Thank God most of the world is not and will not accept this Repulsive and Disgusting Evil, they are just going To Hell in Different ways, such as their choice of CULTS ALSO KNOWN AS RELIGIONS. We will chose how we live, and THE ONE GOD WILL CHOSE HOW WE FACE ETERNITY. HAVE A NICE DAY.

Leftist progressive loons have much in common with the cults…they are just as crafty misdirecting from anything that detracts from the cult….

And they twist the words of the opposition to lie about their positions, and slander them.

But what is truly hilarious, these emotion led nutters often are bested by the straw men they set up….lacking the intellectual capital to critically defeat a premise….

The evil spirit would be the Straw Man argument they thought would be easy to defeat to smear their opponents:

15 And the evil spirit answered and said, “Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are you?”
16 Then the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, overpowered them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded. (Act 19:15-16 NKJ)

You religious fanatics have been saying exactly the same things for two thousand years.

The world is coming to an end. The world is full of sin. The Bible says this. The Bible says that.

Matthew 16:28 says “There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

Almost every religious sect has predicted the End of The World and The Second Coming.

World War One was the end of the world in recent. Then World War Two became the end of the world. Then there were predictions the world would end in 1988 for some strange reason. Then the Y2K computer bug signaled the end of the world.

The End Of The World has been just around the corner for two thousand years.

Maybe one of these days the religious nutjobs that wish for an apocalypse will get their wish.

I prefer to live my life one day at a time with a positive attitude. If Jesus returns, then we can talk about things.

I am certain Jesus will forgive me if I am skeptical of religious wingnuts and their false predictions of an impending apocalypse.

@orchidcup… didn’t you hear? It was cancelled. So no afterparty… Oh well. But seriously … They found another mayan calendar that goes way beyond that date. And if you think about it…the one where people say the world will end on 21 Dec…the calendar ens a cycle, that’s all. So when one ends a new one will begin.
Other than that I agree with you on what you said before!!! Let’s talk when the fairy tale comes true.

Just a thought: All these gay marriages include lots of money spent on wedding clothes, receptions, gifts, travel and hotel accommodations for the guests, etc. = good for the economy.

Gay newlyweds are the new job creators!

Search

Search for:

Support the Blog — Buy This Book!

For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!